Russell v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Russell v. State

557 S.W.3d 523

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 11, 2018

DocketNo. ED 106085

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 557 S.W.3d 523 (Russell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Russell v. State, 557 S.W.3d 523 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

T.J. Russell ("Movant") appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Movant's sole point on appeal is his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise an alibi defense and call his mother to testify in support at his trial. Finding no clear error, we affirm. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

T.J. Russell ("Movant") appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Movant's sole point on appeal is his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise an alibi defense and call his mother to testify in support at his trial. Finding no clear error, we affirm. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

557 S.W.3d 523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russell-v-state-moctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack